Memory Beta:Votes for approval of supplemental images
Colorized IKS emblem I'd like opinions on wether we can (or should) use a colorized version of the Imperial Klingon States emblem. For the record: FASA only printed a B&W version (in The Triangle (book), of which the unmodified version shown is a direct scan. The never produced (nor specifically described) a color one. However, since it's a bit stark in a color medium, I made a colorized version based on the color sceme of the TOS Klingon emblem we have up (see, for example, Battle of Donatu V). The lightning/squigggly bolt uses one of the darker reds from our general Klingon Empire emblem. Is this within the bounds of acceptability here?--Emperorkalan 20:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC) :I'm definitely happy with the image and having one with color is definitely preferable. It's not as if you have changed anything about the symbol itself and the colors used have been used for the official Klingon trefoil design. --Dr. John Smith 21:03, 26 June 2007 (UTC) ::Hmm, that's very nice, but I'm not sure about the appropriateness, I could be swayed either way. --8of5 21:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC) :::I think the nearest example would be Image:Al-Rashid.jpg (the Presidential Transport), in that it merely interpolates within a well-established framework. It's not being sprung from whole cloth here -- it's just adding color to an actual FASA design. B&W was an appropriate choice for a printed page, but on a web page, next to all the blues and reds from the hyperlinked text, it seems oddly jarring. (and the whole point of such an illustration is to add "color" to the text, not throw you out of context by thinking "Yikes! That looks AWFUL!".) :::I'd insist on the TOS color scheme even if it weren't my own item because that's what FASA used whenever they printed a Klingon emblem in color. For me, the real question was how to handle the bolt, and lacking any clear markers I made a relatively conservative choice. It's also an item where we can clearly record its pedigree (unlike, say, the Starfleet Intelligence symbol we use), so we don't leave any room for confusion.--Emperorkalan 11:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Generally I am opposed to modifying perfectly acceptable images just to make them fit into what we like best, and to that end I will not vote in favour of this image. However, this is a reasonable sort of update so I won't vote against it either.--8of5 09:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC) I'm swayed by the colourised image but the monotone emblem is the 'official' version. As you may have noticed I created a vector image of the colourised emblem which I was kindly informed was still under discussion. If you want me to I can change the colours to black if you'd like and TBH, I agree with Emperorkalan, the colours do look awful. ~ Gav236 (voicemail) • (nation) 17:58, August 26, 2010 (UTC) File:Mirrortorres.JPG I'd like to bring this one back around for the community to look at. The screencap we currently use (above) is of lower quality and i don't approve of it (it was snuck in without a vote as far as i can tell) -- but this drawing was submitted by the same user and rejected, but I think it has more merit than the screencap. -- Captain MKB 22:00, November 27, 2009 (UTC) :See comment on vote above ^ or in short, we can use a screencap, and therefore dont need this rather odd looking drawing. --8of5 15:15, November 28, 2009 (UTC) There we go > From the episode Barge of the Dead, does the trick for me, what do you think? --8of5 17:26, November 30, 2009 (UTC) ::Well, using the pic of her in the Klingon uniform kind of misses the point. The photoshop and drawing illustrate her wearing an Alliance intendant's getup, which is not a Klingon armor per se. -- Captain MKB 13:33, December 1, 2009 (UTC) *'Yes' -- Captain MKB 22:00, November 27, 2009 (UTC) *'Yes' -- The Doctor 22:11, November 27, 2009 (UTC) *'No'--8of5 15:15, November 28, 2009 (UTC) *'No' --Columbia clipper 18:02, November 28, 2009 (UTC) *'No'-- Not Spock 13:25, September 7, 2010 (UTC) Titan images thumb thumb thumb thumb thumb Mike seems to have forgotten to say anything :P So to summarise, these images were uploaded by User:Turtleturtle93, and they were created by Star Trek: Titan author Geoffrey Thorne. These and further character illustrations from Titan in the style of a would-be animated version of the series can be found on Thorne's [http://damoclesannotated.blogspot.com/ Sword of Damocles annotations blog]. User:Columbia clipper has handily found out we have already been granted permission to use them. So question is, should we use them (and potentially the other Thorne illustrations). As a general principle I think author created images are significantly preferable candidates for supplemental images to ones by our users; as they were created by the creators of the characters in question, and they know what they imagined while we can only interpret their descriptions. We also have precedent for this, we already have a few images by Christopher L. Bennett (Torvig Bu-Kar-Nguv, Orilly Malar and K'chak'!'op) I see two potential problems. These images were created under the premise of them being stylised for a Titan animated series. This stylisation includes TNG tv era style uniforms, or variations there of, as well as a new combadge. While we know from the Titan novel covers these characters continue to wear the TNG movie era uniforms. Is that an acceptable inaccuracy? The other issue is where we already have images from Titan covers and Bennett they offer very different interpretations compared to Thorne's versions, is this a problem? Having potentially two very different images illustrating the same thing? I think when we have a cover image we shouldn't use a supplemental image as well (so I don't think we should use the Aili Lavena submitted here), but when we have two conflicting author images it could get tricky. Columbia Clipper has also already suggested we could use these, but only in the background sections of pages. I support this usage as a starting point, it seems entirely appropriate to include background on how an author envisions his characters. Though that does open a new issue; if we set that precedent should all character supplemental images be relegated to background sections? --8of5 04:57, July 17, 2010 (UTC) :I don't think that precedent would be set; these images are intentionally impressionistic (why the uniforms are non-standard). We should safely be able to integrate these images as background material while keeping images of more descriptive intent where they are. More directly: these pictures aren't meant to represent the Titan crew (main article); they're meant to represent what the Titan crew might look like in a hypothetical animated series (background). :I agree regarding Ali Lavenna and other characters who may appear on novel covers or in other official publications. -- Columbia clipper 23:25, July 31, 2010 (UTC) ::Thinking about this a bit more, if we are only using these as background section images then I think we should include the characters we have existing images of, to give all the characters the same level of coverage in regard to this author's illustration project. --8of5 19:35, August 1, 2010 (UTC) * Yes, in background sections, excepting Ali Lavenna, Deanna Troi, Will Riker, Ree, and Tuvok. -- Columbia clipper 23:25, July 31, 2010 (UTC) * Yes, in background sections only. --8of5 19:35, August 1, 2010 (UTC) * Double vote: No' but if I am outvoted, then I must say background only with the lot of them. -- Captain MKB 21:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC) *'Yes'-- Not Spock 13:25, September 7, 2010 (UTC) Mandana I've uploaded the above image of Scottie Thompson, the actor who portrayed Nero's wife, Mandana, in makeup and costume on the film set. The copyright of the image belongs to Thompson, who released the image on her website (it's currently down) for promotional purposes, and on Girls2Watch.com, a career-promoting website for young female actors. I propose its use to illustrate the Mandana article. Mandana isn't clearly visible in the film, for artistic reasons. This image pictures the actress as she appeared in-costume, and in a setting that could pass for a field on Romulus. There are non-canon images of the character available, but none show the character's painted/tattooed markings, which were visible on screen. --Columbia clipper 23:25, July 31, 2010 (UTC) :This character appears in both the movie and comics, we simply don't need this additional behind the scenes image when we can comprehensively illustrate the character with existing in-universe sources. --8of5 19:32, August 1, 2010 (UTC) ::I'm going "neutral" right now. Certainly it is interesting to see those tattoos, but your statement has a bit of a non-sequitur, Columbia Clipper -- you state the tattoos can be seen onscreen, but you say there are no images available where the tattoos are visible? Which is it? -- Captain MKB 21:34, August 1, 2010 (UTC) :::I think Clipper meant that you can see in the movie that she has tattoos, but can't make them out very well. That's my interpretation, anyway. I like the image. --Archimedean 17:11, September 13, 2010 (UTC) I don't think whether or not we like the image is the issue, the fact is we already have perfectly adequate images of this character from more than one source. Images that are sufficient to illustrate what is quite a small article, so we simply do not need an additional unofficial images of this character. --8of5 17:23, September 13, 2010 (UTC) * Yes -- Columbia clipper 23:25, July 31, 2010 (UTC) * No --8of5 19:32, August 1, 2010 (UTC) * Yes --Archimedean 17:11, September 13, 2010 (UTC) Mirror badge thumb|Mirror badge. Depiction of the badge worn by the mirror crew in the DC Comics storyline, created by tracing and digitally coloring images of the mirror logo and the 2280s starfleet logo. -- Captain MKB 05:56, August 26, 2010 (UTC) :Neat! --8of5 14:24, August 30, 2010 (UTC) ::I want to be picky - especially since you've done such a nice job - but is that the right Terran Empire symbol? It looks like the ENT logo, not the TOS one. --Archimedean 19:51, September 13, 2010 (UTC) ;Votes *'Big YES' --8of5 14:23, August 30, 2010 (UTC) * Yes --Archimedean 17:09, September 13, 2010 (UTC)